The DRP Legislative Package aims to remedy our constitutional troubles. Read here for further context if you want it. The number of items has been increased from 4 to 5.

Item 1: Amendment to Formally Adopt Instant-Runoff Voting for Elections [TLDR] This would officially implement the system of voting that we decided to use during the count of the September election cycle. The language is simply changed to specify the type of alternative voting used.

The language in Section 3.1 of the constitution regarding elections’ voting methods shall be changed from reading “...alternative vote system” to read “...instant-runoff voting (IRV) system” as follows:

Government officials are elected monthly by the citizens. If one wishes to be a government official, they must be a citizen and announce their candidacy 5 days before the end of the month. Voting will begin 3 days before the end of the month. Citizens vote for candidates using the instant-runoff voting (IRV) system. On the last day of the month, the votes are tallied, and the winners are announced. The winners assume their positions the next day. Government officials can be recalled by a 75% majority vote (besides in the case of the Defense Minister), and if a recall is successful, a new official will be elected in their place to serve the remainder of their term.

Effective immediately upon passage (not retroactive)

Item 2: Amendment to Implement Guidelines for Revising Active Proposals [TLDR] This would require explicit disclosure of any alterations in a proposal over the course of a legislative session without restricting the ability to make said alterations.

The following will be added to Article II of the constitution:

2.1.4 Proposal Revision

It is the responsibility of citizens who make proposals to explicitly detail any alterations to the proposal that may change its functionality or interpretation. This applies at all stages of the legislative process. If an active proposal thread is edited or changed between stages (ie: [proposal], [re-proposal], and [vote]), disclosure must be made in the following thread.

Disclosure is done by leading the body of the thread for the next stage with language that identifies changes and where they were made. Once a vote thread is posted it may not be edited to alter any language in the proposal. The only exception to this rule is for insignificant edits such as correcting spelling errors which may be done at any stage, including [results].

If language that changes the functionality or interpretation of a proposal is not disclosed as outlined, the proposal is automatically nullified during the voting process.

Effective September 12th 2022 (not retroactive)

Item 3: Amendment to Effectuate 48 Hour Voting Period for Elections [TLDR] The current timeframe between the start of voting and the publication of results is 48 hours. This would require ballots to be submitted within that time frame in order to be counted

The following language in bold would be added to section 3.1 of the constitution:

Government officials are elected monthly by the citizens. If one wishes to be a government official, they must be a citizen and announce their candidacy 5 days before the end of the month. Voting will begin 3 days before the end of the month. Citizens vote for candidates using the alternative vote system. On the last day of the month, the votes are tallied, and the winners are announced. Ballots must be submitted within exactly 48 hours of the vote thread’s publication to be counted. The winners assume their positions the next day. Government officials can be recalled by a 75% majority vote (besides in the case of the Defense Minister), and if a recall is successful, a new official will be elected in their place to serve the remainder of their term.

effective beginning with October 2022 elections (not retroactive)

Item 4: Amendment to Create Process for Constitutional Disputes [TLDR] This would create a process for resolving disputes of constitutional and legal interpretation where no consensus can be reached. It would be done using a democratic vote regarding the meaning of specific language in question. This provides an alternative to arguing until the heat death of the universe.

Article VIII. Review of Law

9.1 Preconditions for Review. The process to resolve disputes that arise regarding the constitution or laws may be invoked at any time independently of the legislative session. This is done to clarify the people's intended application of existing language.

9.2 Initiating Review. A citizen must make a thread with “[Review]” leading the title to initiate the process. They must state; The part of the law under contention, the existing language in question, a clear statement about what they assert that language to mean. The original author(s) of the pertinent legislation are allowed and encouraged to state what their intentions were in the comments to contribute to debate.

9.3 Voting on Interpretation. After the [Review] thread has been open for debate for 48 hours, the citizen who posted it may move on to make a [Review Vote] thread. This must be linked to the [Review] thread and no discussion outside of voting is permitted in it. Those who believe the law should be interpreted as argued by the player who invoked the review will vote “Aye”. Those who do not agree with the stated interpretation will vote “Nay”. The voting thread will remain open for 48 hours. Precedent will be determined by the majority vote.

9.4 Setting Precedent.

[Review Results] Will be posted as the final step which will include the number of aye and nay vote as well as the outcome.

If the majority vote in favor of interpretation as argued by the invoking party, a precedent is set to understand this as the ultimate meaning of the law. Only an amendment can override this.

If a majority votes against the interpretation as argued by the invoking party, one of two things can happen. If there is understood to be only one other possible interpretation, a precedent is set for the opposing interpretation. If it is irrefutably apparent that there are several possible interpretations, a 'Nay' majority leaves the state of the law unresolved until further action is taken.

Any precedent set becomes effective immediately.

Effective immediately upon passage

Item 5: Referendum on Implementing Ministry Autonomy Law [TLDR] This would codify limitations on candidacies and elected officials such that they can typically only run for and hold one elected office at a time. Under our current system this would mean that candidates must choose a favored ministry position to run for.

Candidates who choose to run for multiple elected offices must specify their first priority choice from among the elected offices they’re running for. All other offices they are running for are designated as their secondary priority. This is done during the call for candidates.

A candidate will not be included in the vote for any of their secondary priority offices that are contested. A secondary priority position is considered contested when a single-office candidate runs for it and/or another candidate choses it as first priority.

Effective beginning with October 2022 elections (not retroactive)